ll(%8
hi I jim'i

IR lamasaas

RLLISIIIIS

II'Jill

'ISCHARGE

SWAN-E-SET APPLICATION FOR SEWER TREATMENT PLANT
INCREASE
s Ia ssl I a ~

11% 511 RI
I

ISISS II

'TEM

QlPIR~J,
LMI

!I1
I

I

I

II

I

IV:

GVS&DD - SEWER PUMP STATION - MSLEAN AVENUE

ITEM V.

SOLID WAS'I E SUR AY QUESTIONNAIRL

0 EM VI:

OTHER BUSINESS

I

I

ill+

I'IIS
I

I )iP IIIUilg
[&IIII ~ i as
I
I

I

I

I

KS I

[IIIIII

I

I

l

i

)S
g)g P g ]gy

I@If
iijg g jj, — —;,: aaai alB llli Ilail I I

i

a

~ ~a

a~~

»~m3 laal

— — - — 'amSSSSI JIIS ~ ~a ~ ~ Saaa
iaiii l jjggg ~ll IS ~ jmm j
Sl III
- — Wag fg4-,jj~ ''s aS Saal
==.--~~1&~SII1jllllRlliii~s'-—
" '
gjmss aasaaa
~aINI1jgjjijgigsasaaaae
MIIIIKs saaamdNI'»~ "
I

NiiI~

ls

~llgI

J

~

'

.,

~

: '.~Sl~s
~aalu

THB CORPORATION OF THB CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTBCHON COMMfITEB
MINUTES

A meeting of the Environmental Protection Committee was held in the Second Floor Meeting
Room, 2580 Shaughnessy Street, Port Coquhlam, Wednesday, November 23. 1994 at 5:00 p.m.

In attendance were:
Councillor M. Gates, Chairman
Councillor R. Talbot, Co-Chairman
J.E. Yip, P. Eng., Deputy City Engineer
F, Cheung, P. Eng., Project Engineer
C. Deakin, Engineering Secretary

CQ5FIRMATIOKQF MINIJTBS
The Minutes of the Environmental Protection Committee Meeting held on Wednesday,
November 9, 1994 were considered, read and adopted.

EE555E„RI)fEB SOCKEYE PUBLIC REVIEW BOARD
Committee chose to await the findings of the Fraser River Sockeye Public Review Board prior
to making a decision. Deputy City Engineer to respond to Mr. Cummins with copies to the
Mayor and Councillors.

ITEM II:

PROPERTIED COOIJITLAM RIVER WILDLIFE MANAGEhBBA'REA

Deputy Engineer gave brief verbal update on other Committee's comments.
SWAN B SM'PPLICATION FOR SEWER
- DISCHARGE INCREASE

TRBA~

Committee made the following
(gal comments regarding the discharge increase:
a) Provincial govemmcnt should make sure discharge is monitored regularly.
b) Government should make sure any concerns are met prior to approval; and
c) Swan E Set shouldn't be aBowed to regulate themselves.

ITEM IVt

GVSADD SHWEL PUMP STATION - MCLEAN

Committee received this item for information. Copy of layout will be forwarded to Mayor and
Councillors.

Cont'd .../2

II

Il Rl%

~ s ss c 1 I I! Igg I k, l
I

ha

I

1

i

I

I

I

-2-

ITEM V:

SOLID WASTE SURVEY OUESTIONNAIRE

After some discussion Committee suggested that a cost review be done and a decision on
whether to use self-addressed envelopes or not. This item is to be addressed at a future meeting.

ITEM VI
a)

OTHER BUSINESS

o~

in Public Places - Bvlaw Develooment

Committee received this item for information.

b)

Annlication ttt the Multi-Material Rccycfittg
Financial Assistance Prouratn
Committee received this item for information.

c)

Pitch In Camoaign
The Committee approved $ 725 for this year's Pitch In Campaign. A report will be
forwarded to Council.

The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
c

p.~Q
Deploy C(t)t Engineer

Counclljtfr M. Gates
Comrf)fttee Chairman

IEY/cd

1111115

IP $

KQK:

Minutes not read and adopted by the Committee until certified correct by the
Committee Chairman's signature.

CC'.

Mayor and Councillors
City Administrator
Igor Zahynacz, P, Eng., City Engineer
F, Cheung, P. Eng., Project Engineer
Anne T. Pynenburg, Project Technician

I stn I rig 'I

(Ill If I
ma Ii'I al(

1j

= ass II

Af/f/p 3

-': 4

I

sisa tsianismk~ ~ L1IfaLI!Im~//fs,/ms

'I'I II-.''()K I'()k AT)& ) N ( )I 'I'I I I;
( I'I'y UII I'()KT ('()UL(I'I'LANI

MI2vl()KANDUM
Envir»nmcnt;il Pin(cut»i» C»inmiiie&

DATE: November 21, 1994

FROM:

J.E Yip. P. Lng..
L)epu(Y Cliv Eilgiiiecr

I

SUBJECT:

FRASER RIVER SOCKEYE PUBLIC REVIEW BOARD

ILE: EPC

RECQMMEN DATION:

That the Comminee consider tivo alteniatives:
Support Mr. John Cummins. MP. re&piest for a judicial hiquiry into thc
management and protection of salmon resources; or
await tile findings nf ilie Fraser River Snckeye Public Review Board who are
expected to submit their report to the Ministry of Fisheries and Oceuis by
Febmary 28, 199S before pursuing a judicial enquiry.

b)

9ACKGROX JND (k COMMFJqTS;

A letter from Mr. John Cummins, MP, dated October 7, 1994 was referred to the City'
Environmental Protection Committee for review and consideration. The letter is seeking support
for a judictal enquiry into the management and protection of the salmon resource. City Coui)cil
is invited to pass a resolution calling for the government to initiate a judicial enquuy into the
Department of Fisheries fdilure to protect and conserve West Coast salmon stocks.

To date the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, the Honorable Brian Tobin, P.C., M.P» has

announced the formation of the Fraser River Sockeye Public Review Board. This Board has
been appouited to examine the Fraser River Sockeye Management anal will have tliree main
objectives:
I)

To identify the reasons for the discrepancies in the expected and the actual

2)

To evaluate the accuracy of the Pacific Salmon Commissions (PSC)
mythology for estimating run sizes aixl sockeye escapement in the Fraser
River; and

3)

To make recommendations on how any difficiencies can be corrected.

nuiriber of sockeye salmon arriving on the spawning groun&is;

begmning in 199s.

Attached is a c»pv of ihe Terms of Reference for the Board. as well as a list of the
n)en)bars &vl»1 have been appointe&l i» it Also att:iched is a copy of the public notice indicating
(he I'irst meetings to be hehl ai the Vane(airer Traile aml Convention Center.

I

C»1)I II

S

I

~ I'(

II

I

I

I

I

~I

II, fmrff
I

~

j

dllgf1I

Iaii

—

»-

i

-

—

~ ~

3» l«1 all ~ a
I

lii'iii
':I

'

I

~~

.

—

———

IIII S I

~

Ik

~

—
—

I

I

'~': ji 4

.car'%1) 'I

'

'I

I

I

« Ix

j

Itl& l

u( 1«I

«a I)ill) ~ ~u

W I

"'asasa

~

.= ')I ff«»i»w»,w tii,,"~, —.,
=

'

~

I

I»i(vi'1

&4jfi4)11

'

~

~ ~

s&

I&(i

~a(

',,,

)

I

ll

II» K

'IILlligI'" =

—

jII,ij,~

—

'
I

lll+U il li

"--I IAR.

=-=

u(g

-=

The Comminee may wish to consider two alternatives: 1) snppon the request for
which will provide an indcpenclant assessment of the situation under the
scheduled to
hlquiries Act or 2) await the Fraser River Sockcye Public Review Board's report
tt
that the
is
noted
judicial
enquiry.
bcl'ore
formal
a
pursuing
1995
28,
bc submitted February
fomlation
the
Zhtthelt
is
urging
I'rovincial Government under the B.C. Fisheries Minister David
of a Pacific Resource CIInscrvation Cuullcil to plovide leadership in west coast fisheries stock
conscfvallvn afal Inettagcntcltt.
s iudicial enquiry

J. E. Yip, P. Eng.
Deputy City Engineer
JEYnal

It I &limit

II
ljjl

j)

jg'I

tILI

I

I

$

/ 1

I',''II
I

li

II II

i.
.
II

I

ll

~

'I!.:= .: ';I

'l

IlII ~ I
~ Is l ill

I

I! / II

jgi g

illliri ~

I

i

I

„.

dphil'III~ w+IwI= =..=.~vII, Ig=-===.= vvIIs —.—

f

g

—

-: ~Ivantll!~

-!"'
li

''-':

jn tamil a, e

'";:=

— —

— — -"-

I

o

—

=

'.-'

na

~

='=:=

I II

a&P 1

ll'1 SIn ~

I

'I

ll 1

Il

ii'I
5 I

$

~ la

at
al k i

I

I

I S

III

satstvI&mg wtsjts-l': "'=:
'mleaatastt
'
%ISO
~ raw

~

Iaa I

'
la

~

II

'ra "*'=ll'sw Ill gllpml'I I,I '"''"'

mtIIIIR'LBI11

!

llS I 'III ~ l

I

O'ItlvL mS Il

w II1LI

. ~ i=,=.=-

.'Ital jat,-.":.

=il

HS ~ IW

1IRI

I

Sl

J

()I

—" r

pozT CogUITI.AbA

-'-~

540 SIIAUGIIXESSY STkEET. I'OXT COQC4TLASI. B.C.

VIC All / PIIOXF.. '144.5411! FAX 444.540

October l9, I 994

II

I

Mr. John Cummins, MP
4871 Delta Street
Delta, BC
V4K 2T9

B

SIII

Dear Mr. Cummins:
Thmlic you for your letter of October 7, 1994 regarding

a judicial inquiry into the management

and protection of salmon resources.

l wili review this proposition with the Councillors

and reply to you at the earliest opportunity.

L. M. Traboulay

Mayor
LMT/jln

I II

I i!'Iii

IIIN I sl

I

T. Chong, City Administrator
Counciliors

ccl

i tiII

)

1ILIIijm

I IjII: it%ii i
II I

114

4

11

144

14141

I

111

IIIIIi

I,

Ii

I

'

I

'I Ijj Ii

'i;

='"I 4

.

jI

II
4

4

11

4111

1

4

I

(@

ll

ia

~

I

I

I

I

I 4

~ I

a5

I

5 I I

II

I

I~4 4

I

I Is

I

4

~4

'I!I

1

I

~ 4!

I 0 I ! I a el

I

1

NII

~S',:I,
::;;„; aa
4'1

Ili fi IIIIIII!

'~s 4'

.

~

au, !is,

~

~ —

''
II

I

I

— F ~ sal , ii'I ..
4iJ Ml $ 4%1 I II
I

'

Illgl

II

Sssss

D il,ll ~ il

'll "" "I'"

lMllli)i;i i i

ls ~ = - =-"-

-"= '-

-

- -4

4

1111

1

I

I

I

iir 4 4

141
4

m

I
1

Is 4 14ii
i

1

1

4',.

4l

Isis

114

I Ill rill

li

I

IHssas

sas

al 441 I 4 5!II

rkl

I

gi Sl Sll I
I

+II si

~
=:=.
=
Ill!'=.:
4 ss Is I

'llilI!
4

N,a

i 4 sail II IIs
'
sl l 4II IS Si
1

I g] II Stri

I

Nn

I

$4

IIII4

—~

ls ~ Ul
IF

L&a

I

's

HOU

E:

CONSTITIIENCYOFFICE
Nttf OEATJ ST.
SEATS, 0 C.

ET'44

044

CON 404 44
US C CO

(.OMMQN'lstta

Cl COAIAOS At 0

V4KSISI

ISO t604I 0406040
FAK. I6OO 04060 I

0

II I I
46 III 04 2644

OTTAWA, ON
K1A OA6

October 7, 1994
Mayor Len Traboulay
City of Port Coquitlam
2580 Shaughnessy

Port Coquitlam, BC
V3C 2A8

Dear Mayor Traboulay and Council:
Within the last month the Minister of Fisheries has acknowledged the loss of some
3 miliion salmon on the Fraser River. The Minister's response was first to appoint
an internal review to be conducted by senior management within the'sdepartment.
After leaked Fisheries enforcement reports detailed the department diminished
efforts in enforcement, the Minister appointed a so-called Independent Review
Board
On a careful reading of the Minister's announcement it became clear that the
review was anything but an independent and comprehensive review of his
department. The so-called Independent Review Board is to be driven by a

departmental management team's internal review and advice.

The Minister's review Is simply another in-house study conducted for the most
part by persons already advising the Fisheries'epartment on its operations. Their
the
report will be no more effective or revealino than the Pearse-Larkin Report into the
into
1992 disaster on the Fraser River, the Peat Marwick Report
Rawson/Flumian expense accounts, or the 1994 Gardner Pinfoid Report on the
Aboriginal Fishing Strategy.

„'e

of the
desperately need a judicial inquiry into the management and protection
in
trouble
the
of
bottom
to
the
salmon resource; an inquiry that can actually get
/nguiries
the
under
inquiry
the Fisheries'epartment a public and independent
Act having the power to subpoena witnesses and take testimony under oath.

III I IIIIPI
II ll 11$ I"1

Jl

I

1mSs

I

,-;f|(ltjlb-

lllgi f

jI'll '-"

I.''l Isl

I

llsl

Eii ""-::
'I&&ill

III Ilalla ill

III

L=:

—

'

-

—

slatt

-I-I Hl IQII
QI

I

—

t

—

~

it%

gas iizoIoj Ijggjgji 66 III
I

.

'

':4»a 06

—

I

'

~ ~—

tm

~

lily

.IIN laIIRIIIslls 0
~

—

—

~

—

—

os

.—

— I/loa= c '

IM,'s,~ aalgg IL",'

I

I

-2I invite you and your council to pass a resolution calling upon the government to
initiate a judicial inquiry into the Department of Fisheries'ailure to protect and
conserve West Coast salmon stocks. Please inform Minister Tobin of your support
for a judicial inquiry. I would appreciate a copy of your cbrrespondence to him.

If we in British Columbia work together, I believe we have a good chance of

developing and protecting salmon stocks, their habitat, and a profitable
commercial fishery.
urs truly,

AE
Delta
M.B.

Correspondence to Minister Tobin should be addressed to:
The Honourable Brian Tobin, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Fisheries and Oceans
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A OA6

.'I [JIB

.

I I

5 IHEH1ES

I VAL COALITIOIII
September 27, 1994

vox 387
1755 Robson Street
Vancouver, B.C. V6G 3B7
Tel: (604)

l

684-890~ (604) 687
r

("j(ttklttb

Mayor Len Traboulay

City of Port Coquitlam

2580 Shaughnessy
Port Coquillam, BC V3C 2AB

'~g

18% r

Dear Mayor Traboulay an~~ou ciP
As you are probably aware, a major salmon spawning disaster has occurred on the
Fraser River. This is the second disaster in three years. We are an organization of
some 12,000 individuals and associations with a direct stake in the B.C. fisheries
resource and consequently, are deeply disturbed. We are asking for your support for a
public, judicial-type inquiry into this second devastation of prized B.C. salmon stocks.

The need for an inquiry is readily apparent after the federal Department of Fisheries
(DFO) attempted to blame any force outside their department for this latest crisis.. For
example, DFO blames the fish counting station at th Mission Bridge on the Fraser
River. Following the 1992 disaster, however, DFO appointed Drs. Peter Larkin and
Peter Pearse to investigate the Mission operations. Dr. Larkin wrote in his conclusion:
"When the various lish stocks are aggregated, the overall
discrepancy plus or minus over the past 15 years was
T. T per cent."

The counting station is operated by the Pacific Salmon Commission, a
authority. The reputation of the Commission has surpassed DFO's as
being a reliable, timely source of information about Fraser River salmon.

joint'anada/L.S.

I h. (

Of a second concern are comments by DFO's Assistant Deputy Minister of Operations
during the news conference announcing the disaster. He assured the media the& there
was no linkage between poaching on the Fraser River and the "missing" fish. Further
assurances were made that there had been no cuts to enfor"ement operations in 1994.

Contrary to these assurances, documents leaked by concerned DFO employees prove
that enforcement cuts crippled DFO's management ability to the point that enforcement
was non-existent in many areas. Poaching was rampant. These excerpts from one of
the leaked documents (copy attached) indicate just how serious the problems are:
"Reduction in staff and operational resources has resulted
proper control and
in reduced capabilities to maintain
"
accountability of the fishery

r2

11/15/155a

Frr c65T:4 ict I& L ti

6eaa646280

15: 55

I

lri,
I'raser River Sockeye I'Jfblic Revietv Board
"" 'v
Le Coyygitff d'examen puMie dfI safffffon rouge dff I'raser,,
tl~;;s 1~
Fits
Pj7

( Ql

i

UEPT

November 7, 1994

Mr. Mike Forrest
Member, Fraser Panel
Pacific Sahnon Conunission
1620 Knappen Street
Port Coquitlam, BC V3C 221

Jgg

Dear Mr. Forrest:

I am writing to advise you that the Frascr River Sockeye Public Review Board has begun its work. The Board
must fulgll its mandate and submit its report to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans by Fcbruaty 28, 1995.
The Board would particularly welcome your comments with respect to the matters raised in its terms of
reference. A copy of the terms of reference for the Board are enclosed with this letter.
In the course of our dehberations we intend to hold meetings, consultations and discussions with a broad
cross-semion of stakeholders and the public, utiliring an open process that will allow concemcd parties full
access to the Board. Board Members will carefully review al! written submissions and it is our hope that in the
course of our consultative process the submimions of selected parties can bc more fully discussed.
Presently we have scheduled pubgc meetings for November 23, 25 and 29, 1994 in Vancouver. Further public
meetings will be held from time to time and in various places as the Board's work proceeds and these meetings

if'our

vrill be advertised,

Though we realize that the notice is short, we would appreciate receiving a written submission lrom you by
no later than Friday, bfovember 18, 1994. We would further request that you provide an executive summaty
brief is longer than 20 pages.
U'pon receipt of your submission we wili be in a position to contact you regarding meeting with you to discuss

tlat
rt

it lbrther,

RiiI .=-"',~

If you require further information pertaining to our request, please do not hesitate to contact Sheila-Marie

SIIII %lilt', I
Iml Itlltg ILII S

We look forward to your participation and to receiving your comments by November 1 8, 1994.

Cook, Executive Director, at 604-666-4665.

1gSI~

Thc Hon. John Fraser, P.C., Q.C.

ilagg ll1lg
I

jl

tI
s'il IIII rIill
'6

Chairman
t

6

Attachmanls

LIam laiL' I(5
y ry,

I

I44IF~%
!I

k

I/ jIlsl tmt

il
650 - 580 Htxnbr Street, Vatxxalvcr. BC V6C 386
Fsx
Pbeee

604~ 604~

IjaijLI;...; ~
!

g+ssati la [

inill lmlllll I
Iheil

tt3V-15-1954

tI~jl

I

t
j

t rai I s I
i

15i 4C

NOV23

I

II a i gg 6g m
1

i rI IuI -

-, ~ I a

I

I

ts tI I fI
I

I

I

i

ira r

~

r r ~ i n I I sa m ~ —
I

1

f~ l st
i

I

~

i

11/15/1994

15: 55

FUkca)

6044646980

~»I»- LI)

E'raser River Eockeye PuMie RevieHJ Board
Le COprdie dreXafneff public du SaumOFf reuge du EraSer
Members of the Board
The Honourable John Frascr, P.C., Q.C.
Chairman

Canada's Ambassador for the Environment. Former Speaker for tho Houso of Commons
and former Jvfndstcr cf Fisheries,

i~
I

4 4444446I

Dr. Lee Alverson
I

American Ssheries scientist and former U,S. negotiator for the Paciac Sahnon Treaty.

Mr. David Brander-Smith
Vancouver lawyer with expertise in maritime law, including the Law of the SeL He is
currently the Chairman of the Director's Advisory Board of the Institute of Ocean
Sciences.

sea Inl

Dr Peel LeBlond
Oceanographer &em thc University of Bridsh Columbia and a member of Fisheries
Rcsourcc Conservation Conned.

Dr. Richard Routledge
Professor of statistics at Simon Frsser University in British Columbia

Dr. Joseph Scrimgcr
Acoustics expert &om British Columbia worhng at the Institute of Ocean Scicuces /OS)
in Sidney, B.C.

L'"-iii fi
I

tml Iiml I
I,III'j4™sti qgf

650- 380 Homer snoot, Vsoooover. BC V6C 3B6

ki=.
II

Paooo 6066664665 FSX 604666-4666
I»»»V II»

I I i i i i »» iR I

N3I/-15-1994

i

il44

~

a

~

»»mill
3 il

1

1'I'l~

15: 45

'll»a»ann»s»44 mm»»»am»o»tggnm44a~~~
lanai&'IMI'aaa

iig~

411111

ill

gp

IIIII
~

I

ol

~

ya»

3
ml

i

I

"

'

'',;,

'll II/Ill III''

-

i/i I~n::
m'

— —

—

—

~

~, air»

'''

w..„'"
'

—

gdl U» 14

-—

'-'~~

as sjg

'

+

'

1

d 6444 14

x

1»»» 4
Rll Ja
6

lgl I,',, -m

ltiilim

I

I

i

n

I

"a SR
lalRI
1lig

11'15/1994 15: 55

8844505288

PUBLIC

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE FRASER RIVER SOCKEYE
REVIEW BOARD

The Public Review Board appointed to examine Fraser River sockeye management
the
will have three main objectives: first, to identify the reason(s) for the discrepancies in
second,
expected and actual number of sockeye salmon arriving on the spawning grounds;
for
to evaluate the accuracy of the Pacific Salmon Commission's (PSC) methodologymake
third,
to
River;
and,
Fraser
the
in
estimating run sizes and sockeye escapement
recommendations on how any deficiencies cau be corrected, beginning in 1995.
The review will include consideration of the following areas:
PSC's

The accuracy of estimates of the number of sockeyc salmon moving past the
the
hydroacoustic facihty at Mission in 1994. This aspect of the review will examine
Early
Stuart,
Early
componcntst
run
the
major
four
accuracy separately for each of

"'.

actual
Summer, Summer and Late Summer. It will include an evaluation of the
from
estimates
to
used
prepare
acoustic procedures and the analytical methods
acoustic data.

2.

The level of mortality experienced by sockeye salmon in the Fraser River and on the
all time
spawning grounds in 1994. Temperatures throughout the Fraser River were at
high throughout the period Irom mid July to nud August 1994. The evaluation will
examine the eQ'ect of these temperatures, in conjunction with average flow conditions
experienced in 1994 and other relevant factors, cn the level of mortality experienced
evaluation will also
by sockeye salmon while en route to the spawning grounds. This
including forestry
Fraser
River,
identify causes of elevated water temperatures in the
practices.

INNI[iiiittij

Sgp la ia a I
Isg ~ "~ Iala i

~

i

alllli illM

I'I

il I
I

Ig

LSII

il
1 If5

,mp
'a'ill'i
Si

ISI11 .

I

I

ii 1

'

The accuracy of estimates of the number of sockeye salmon on the spawning grounds
in 1994. This aspect of the evaluation will include a review of the various techniques
used to enumerate sockeye salmon on the spawning grounds, the thuilig of arrival of
the sockeye salmon on the spawning grounds, and the rates of tagging and tag
recovery for those stocks enumerated through mark-recapture programs. As required,
information from other years will be used in this assessment.

Ilail

ISiiuulisssi
'weil P

iiI

I

TlllHllllWPO
%

llallal

JY

NISI! N I
III I
III I

II''.: .:;

la
III

iii

8884845r88

I

aliai"g ma

8

h

.'.: " — — aal~

'iia,''

~,

~

k&R"--.".I'CR

'ii

I

The accuracy of estimates of the catch of sockeye sdmon in the Fraser River in 1994.
inThis aspect of the evaluation will include an examination of the reliability of the
river catch monitoring program, techniques used to estimate catches, and procedures
for estimating the con6dence range around the catch estimates.

881

NOV2 3 1gyi

'g gg

Sl/g

'

'ssaaa=" ~tig

II

~il flal Is~

a ~itl Ilagiga ggS

s

In consxxttation with thc PSC, examine thc methods used by the Commission to
predict returning run strength and escapement, both pre-season and in-season. This
aspect will include a . assessment of the accuracy xuxd dependability of the estimation
methods, including the Mission hydroacoustic facility, PSC-contracted test ftsheri s,
and cstimatcs of catch and removal rates in Johustone Strait, Juan dc Fuca Strait and
North Puget Sound fisheries.

The level and eKcacy of DFO stock management, surveillance, mcnitormg and
enforcement activities in the Fras u River and elsewhere where relevant. This aspect
wiH include an evaluation of these issues; snategies implemented; performance
indicators; resources allocated and expended in the fiishcries in 1994, including s
comparison with previous years; data coHcctjon methods in tb" coxnnxexciai, sport an I
aboriginal fxshexies; and the estimated magnitude. of undetected iHegal catches.
The Board wiH be organized to conduct an indepcx.dent investigation of these issues
involving active parricipatfon of aH interested parties aud stakeholder groups, major
organizations and agencies. Meetings, consultations and dis:ussions will be held with a
bmad cross-section of stakeholders and the public, uSizfng an open process that will allow
concexned ipoups and individuals full access to Board members. Written as well as oral
submissf/ ."" '~ the Hoard will be encouraged.
. Board members wiH have full access to aH relevant Department of Fisheries and
Oceans files and personnel, and wiH have the opacity to interview any departmental ofGcials
they deem appropxiate. As weH as conducting its own research, the Board will direct an
intexnal technical review process being carrie out by thc Department of Fisheries and
Oceans (DFO) and vol be kept fully apprised of the internal process and its fmdfngs. The
Board will also consult with thc Paci6c Salmon Commission (PSC) and consider their
fmdings.

The Board wilt receive the technical Gndings of DFO on or before December 31,
1994, for its consideration. The Fraser River Sockeye Public Review Board will submit its
own report to the Mimster of Fisheries and Oceans by February 28, 1995, summarizing its
fmdings from the independent review process and making recommendations on actions
required to address the situation,

Ill

'I

NM~IF'I~atgjlgl~~
x~ — -'
issues Nl~l~n

~ %II

i~sx
~ j~.".

,'--9~I ~ IM

'

:Rl
m~1

~wm
+

cR79est'I'cs

OJNI IJ

";

n~BMRgggx

ssisi t'sat/Gx/tt

'%IS I~ Il~ ii Iilllj
IIII
~aklll !'— :: -'iii'y I—

~'""
...:
—
''1[[1
IIgjjgjjjl~ls~l

11/15/1994

15I55

FORREST IIARII4t= LII/

6044646988

I

Haa

UJ

Tbc public gavtow Board bss boca cppolasai so examine
mcatgemrmo! un tlrssw Rhea sodmyn lbe Sosrd'a main chico
rives are

. to identify the reason(a) foe tho discrepancies hl the

~

expected sad setout nnmbcc of cockeye cabnon arrivIng en thc spawning gwunA
to evaluate the accuracy of the Psctttc Salmon
Conmrtsdclhriunhodctotty fOr
run stsre sad
soctroya esceprrucnt ln tbe Ptnsec Stree
~ to mstm rccommadattern on how any dsgdrader caa
be caczeae4 aglunlag ls 199$.
a report must be uesestrd ni dm Mtntsur of Ptahcdm sad
Qccsns by February 2S, 199$.
Yha Board will tm holding ils first public meedngs sl
the Vsncoa vcr 1tsdc sad
Ccntrc, tntaom 9 00 am
124S noon snd 100 9m-480 pm on
Wcdnmdsyl Novcmbrc03, 1994
PStdny, Novcrahec gfr 1994
'ftteodsyl Norrcnber 29I 1994
1 Sfemsnrd pcrsccs Or tPoutn sre limited tc nullcs presents
tlons lo lhc Bosrd wilb respect lo sny of tho alsncm udlhbl lls
Insndrm Wrhtcn briah sm prohrrcdbm cast tscrcnrstksw msy
be scccpsuL
Flesse sdvtso the Somd es scou ss pnsstbtc cfynur lasuu m
appear. Wdasa bdrfs will bo welcomed huncdlstely and must
be Ierahcd no lsuc thsa Novembccig, 884. Your bdefs should
be sdcrcered mme sxaocdve fumctcc at rhe cddrem bolow sad
shouldbo limitod to St psgea
pladax pub!tc Iecttntn wtg be bold fmm dmc to dma and
in vsrxnn ptscm hs thc Board's ucrk plncor4h snd these meet.
ings will be dverdscd.'Ib ttnd out moro about psdicipstlng in
the Board's review, call our mtt-0xn tntonaadm ham

~

~

W00.$91 9199

Sheila-Msrte,Cook, Exccmbu Dlrecnx
Frsscr Rivw goctmyc Public ttcvicw Sosid
6$0-$80 Hornby Sncwl
LC V6C 3S6
Phoae: (6') 666JI66$ Pac (604) 666JI666

al St 1

I

wi
Owi
I
I

wOV

IIill

-15-1994

15 I

46

II
m Iwas
I

t~ 11 \ la I
I

a

alii alar

llalmmml

Nl

lal Il

rV

Ca
I

~ ~

RP

(
Il

Ii

i

S I
~

i

S

ii '8Lt!
,

ms 9!tl 1 f

I I

I

~

m~

NOV23 W

I

a I ~ I ' II
I

a la I
I

' ill nltl
n I I III ~ III
nt I III. a il

I I II I ~ ra

i

~

'

I

sr all

&

ii)

..l all

~

'=!M~ ni ":.:.%IIII!

li b

J

~mls
la
u ma lallilas s am » ~—

'SII aa Sa

Ie, .a

'

la il I g

ac

=-

~Pi

TION oF pAcIFTc RzsouRcs
ON COUNCXL

zirnhelt today
nister David Conservation
ic Pesource
coast fisheries stock
'n west

the
rtnership of government,
commercial,
holders ('ncluding their
bringing together measures
ons on conservation

British
ound concern among
weakened by

source is being fish counting
shing, incorrect
"X am
," Sai,d Zirnhelt,
'kr
owledgeable
f'r
a means
hery to.make strategic
Oceans
ment of Fisher'es and
t oecisi.ons.
from my federal
rd to a response
for the
victoria
n he comes to month," said
ce 1.ster this work with the
&s willing to
our shared interest in securing
I

Nmm
inly

[j~R

dedicate
is prepared'o
said that the province
would
which
secretariat
1/provincial
ora
d
e
a
f
to
resources
provide suoport to the council.
h the most at
wv&th
" 'itI f e d e ral cooperation, the people
y
involved in p olicmove
directly
be
.
would
'n
.e
fishery
to
the
e
come
"t k i.n
has
stake
t&me
The
solving,
errors,
development and problem
manageme&&d that prevents
salmon
toward proactive

.~P'irnhelt

added Zirnhe3 t.

Il

II
I I ggj

nII&I

I

//'gl

l

l

ill

IIII')Il

S illl(
l!I
I

II

a

II I

1m'I

I

E

~

further info mation, contact
cindy StephensonDirector
Public Affairs
356-2862 (victoria)

94-60

For.

II ~ I

/

THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM
MEMORANDUM

TO:

Environmental Protection Committee

DATE November 16, 1994
FILE: Environmental

Protection Committee
FROM:

C. Felip
Director of Planning

RE:

Proposed Coquitlam River Wildlife Management Area Report

On November 15, 1994 the members of the Planning Committee considered your
Memorandum of November 8, 1994 requesting comments on the proposed Coquitlam

River Wildlife Management Area Report.

Please be advised that the following resolution was passed:
"That the Environmental Protection Committee be advised that the Planning Committee
supports the proposed Coqui;iam River Wildlife Management Area as discussed in the
report titled "Coquitlam River Wildlife Management Area - Management Plan for 19941999".
Enclosed with this Memorandum please find a Memorandum from the Director of
Planning to the Planning Committee providing further information on this subject.

Carlos FeTip
Register

ng

Attachments

CF/dm
C/O/MEMO/NOV94M/ENV/RO

II

sa

4 ~

I I

imtaBI:.

=

~a

II

Sl I.
I

I I119

41481 l

~ S I»

THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM

Fnl."'FF. 4

.

Io''ATE:
6/ ~

November 15, 1994

Fuels

TO:

Planning Committee

FROM

Carlos Felip
f;
Director of Plannmg

f

FILE: Environmental
Protection Committee
I

I

Pmposed Coquitlam River
Wildlife Management Atua ReportPhutnmg and Development Commmee - November 15, 1994

RFCOMMENDATIONI

That the Environmental Protection Committee be adv1sed that the Planning Committee
supports the proposed Coquitlam River Wildlife Management Area as discussed in the report
titled "Coquitlam River Wildlife Management Area-Management Plan for: 1994-1999".
DISCUSSION:

The attached document was referred to the Planning Committee by the Environmental
Protection Committee for utformation and comments.

The report sets the management plan for a proposed Wildlife Management Area located at
the Coquitlam River mouth and including the Esondale Islet.
The report outlined management practices that will be applied to protect habitat and
maintain a biological productivity for Fish and wildlife, together with considerations regarding
recreation and activity, land use con fhcts, legal arrangements etc.

iM

Part of the study area is within Port Coquitlam and has been designated "Park Reserve", in
the Official Community Plan, designation which is consistent with the intent of the attached
report.

iiiiiraiill
Inn 11!1iIRg

55

ill(@i

It would, therefore, be appropriate to advise the Environmental Protection Committee, that
the Planning Committee supports the intent of this report.

i

I Jf

IJ
&"""f"
e!
I I Iffy

l411414 II

lf'+

Carlos~~t~cfi.,
'r, M.C.I.P.

~off.@m I ma

i

St

I

IR

Director of Planning

Regjst6igd Pl

Hli

ttm

11

iw

CF/gg

iilll

ll! VfU
t t
I

ID717/14

I

i

I I I

I

I

~
Il! t I Rl

f ffjH

o"-~'. fgQ

fll

~
11

~ I

~

nlnl

1 ~ I
4 41

41~ Iatu

Stat 4 m

I

II

't t

111

II ~

I

trigllll rt 41411

~

I

~I

4I

~

'

I
I

SI

I

I I

llll II
I

~I

4111

I

~

4 nnn al I

—

t...;,;

U In

4

4 4 N 4 44

if ~ &
4 ut at ar
I

I

I

M nl
I

RATION OF THE
T COQUITLAM
MEMORANDI !M

nvironmental Protection Committee

DATE: November 21, 1994

E. Yip, P. Eng.,
eputy City Engineer

FILE: GVS&DD

VS& DD SEWER PUMP STATION - MCLEAN AVENUE

r request for an update on the District's proposed odour control facility for the
e Pump Station - I contact Mr. Keith Taylor of the District to get an update. Mr.

d the following information:

The design of the facility has been completed.
A tender call was made and two hills were received. The bids however, were
over budget and the District rejected the tenders.

3)

The District has modified the design. They will be re-tendering this work
within the next week or two and foRowing a tender period of approximately
four weeks, the District anticipates that a suitable bid will be received and a
contractor selected by year end.

4)

Construction is scheduled to begin in early 1995 with a construction period
of four months.

5)

The work includes; odour control equipment involving a charcoal filter
systems and fans, complete with out building.

Keith Taylor indicated that their schedule is to have the facility in place and operational for the
summer of 1995. Attached is a letter from the District dated November 17, 1994 outlining their
schedule.

J. E.

P. Eng.

Yip,
'eputy
City Engineer

U

JEY:crl
S

ll

I

r
r

I

'll Iltlt

I

III II

Attachment

'
tl

I a

i'i' ii')))
I

Ill

cc: I.R. Zahynacz, P. Eng., City Engineer

I

lI rlt1

III,lj][l

:~E

flijg .r.«SINAI '118P
I

/,gljitlllrC = — -=

I

'-'t

~ I taa! 4 I lr

I

t

IIRei ntt isaac u sllww sit gg
I

ss ~ r« IBM ~ rrSSI «I 4

IS s ssssst R 5 I
E ,I Sart
~ rsasa s s
SS
w II! 5 ISN gC
ni ~
SS ss % 1 a

r

I

I

S~

~

I

—

gl [s l Npl
I

s

a

I

I

''

NOV23 TNT
sl S rS S
Isla!5!at
'I
t~lEKIP-g I s rr ~ r ~ 'arRI
I I

I

—

=::::== ~

tlg@llslrllsllll !'r S!!E s Ia
=. =- ~ t.rl rsl,st rs
—

I

I

~t+IRtrrm ...,
I-gifts".

4

ta

~

General
Telephone (604) 432-6200
Fax (604) 432-625)

Gn ater Vancottuer Regional District
4330 Kingsutas Bumaby, British Columbia, Canada VSM 4GB

Seteerage and Drainage Department - Telephone (604) 432-6430 - Fax (604) 436-67)4

November 17, 1994

File:SD 92.1216

''I

'3 lt i'A

I

~'01I

City of Port Coquitlam
2580 Shaughnessy Street
Port. Coquitlam, B.C.
V3C 2A8

1

g

584

.C3

Mr. J. E. Yip, P.Eng.
Deoutv Citv Engineer

Attention:

Dear Sirs:
REr GVS&DD Port Coquitlam Sewage Pump Station
Wct Well Ventilation & Odour Control Facility
This letter is to inform you that Tender No. 94082 for Construction of the Port Coquitlam
Sewage Pump Station Odour Control Facility has been cancelled due to lack of interest (only two
tenders) and prices which were far in excess of engineeri "g estimates. The scope of the work
has been somewhat reduced and the project will be retendered shortly. We hope to award a
construction contract early in the new year. We expect a four month construction duration once
work commences on site.

For further information regarding this project, please contact our Mr. Vince Chiu at 436-6913.

Yours truly,

'll I I 1 I I Q

Senior Engineer, Sewers Drainage

I

giIt 'iI gllg

VC:

III"'. =-', ;-'w

I iimliagii

Pll

g II j ae a'ig/
IIIIi-: =:-,,
i

i

II,'gaeiy'iri it
~I

t

ll 'It Ill
I

I

i

I

I

I I

I alla

I

I

'all
ILI

I Il

I

I

I

I

all
1

I

=sal111a
ae

I I r

~ am a
mi

a

t

~
~
~
~
~g~~
utaagI hip

a

mam

I

I

aaasaae

''

wmemilm

11-22-1884 14:27

684 43e 8714

mero SEWERAGE r

P.81

DTOATTOAOE DEFRT.

Greater Vancouver Regional District

4330 Ringsway, Buruaby, British Columbia, Canada VSH 4QB
Senrnrrr nnd Drnlnnrr DrrnPRFnrnr
SORrrps end DpnTnnrr DOPFOFnn

:IT OF PORT COOOITIII
ENI TNFOO!RIC ~ DEPT

Fax Memo
Tn:

Fromt

Nemo
Company
Depaotment
Phone

Jeff

IPQQ

Yip~

SPCIVI

City of Cocfuftlam
Bugineeof ug

Fax

944-3433944-$407

Name
Phone
Fax

Vince Chin
43641913
436-6714

Date:

November 22, 1994

Filo: SD 92.1216

'hne1

Total number of pages, including cover sheet:

02:27 PM

I

GvgihDD PDCD SPS~n~fon Sc Odour Control Fucllllv

Jeff,
P! case see attached as discussed.

ss

'8 s s NI
m

RmlunIua ntfi

Ri L iiILIII.

1

fi,,:: =,'.iiIi'j

Ce. F tleoninafe

5:
jtIi»

="-."-..,"„I
. ',g

I

IT I

I IT

4'I

en

I

RnnoII'Ig

ul Renal

llJI11 lit

~'„''

Ife'. nuui ~
S Ii I EOI I g
I

1

~

Ts

usI I I

If yoo do oot receive all pages. please call as sooe ss posaftotc Oos (6043
TRQV-22-1994

15 I 25

'P

684 436 6714

43~.

I

I "I',

4

DA'

I I

I

'i

Af

I

I I

l
u

gas%a ii il 5

i

( gl lg
/ gi
I

IHIP

leeM Wl lj
iii
jj~ni~i

II

g t thi smell. Tay
"l want to be able to sit on
my lor said no, human waste is to
patio read my local paper and blame.
drink my coffee, and not puke."
Extensive
was done to
Hill, the cool air slides down the
Keith Taylor, administer of sei- detirmine Ihctesting
courcc of odors, behill and it picks up air from the ers and drainage,
said construction cause that would determine the
ump station and mnves to the shnuld begin next spring on odnr- remedy.
ouses across Ihe lane," he said.
control measures. The 5500,000
The measures are being taken to
ln the past, the GVSDD has ad- price tag is one reason
has alleviate thi ndnr prnblem, but also
justed the ventilation system but taken so long. "That's action
ivhy lou for safety.
that just moved the smelly emis- don't jump right to thc final
solu"ilvdrngcn sulfide can
siuns around the clock. According tion. You
try the cheap solutions conc!its, and iI ii nccc. sarycorrode
to imto neighbnrs, it doesn't matter iF it
first."
prove sat'etv of the site for ivorksmells at norm or midnight: it still
Taylor said that Ihe number iif r:rs entering it

you ve left the lid open on, said

Caf Key tor, who lives just upivind.
"When Ihe sun goes past Mary

lllllldl

gj p
s sI

R.lIi ~

SL

-aaara~ i~ s IW
~

aai
Sus a ist

~

— -:mfgm E'= —

==~

& I j Ntt tg g Itt p s- I —.";:
!

aim

SIKI I
SKI Halt
,.':atg -".
'! - —

I

I! ~

Us S

'$
~~

$

INs

I

27500

LC~S

a

NOVr 3 @9f,

%5/]~irma

iaan el ramr

mtMII — --

HQjl

I HF. CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF PORT COQIJITLAM

MEMORANDUM

10:

Gord Voncina,

DATE: November 18, 1994

Opcrattons Manager
Steve Brown
Assistant Operations Manager

FROM:

SUBJECT:

Allen Jensen,
Engineering Project Assistant

GABJIAGE, RECYCLING, COMPOST
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

W'ould you please review the enclosed Garbage, Recycling, Compost, Survey
Questionnaire.

If there are any comments or if you would like to add any questions to this survey please
let me know before 4:00 pm. Tuesday, November 22, 1994. Sorry about the rush but we
have a deadline to get the survey out.

If there are any questions regarding the survey, call me at 944-5420.

Allen Jensen,
Engineering Project Assistant

cc: J. Ih Yip, I'. Eng., Deputy City I ngineer

NOV23 nBJ,

TI I I= CORI.ORA I ION OE

n I E CI T Y Or POR1 COQUI TI.A)VI

GARI)AGE, COMPOSTING, RECYCLING
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

Please check thc appropriate,box or boxes of your choice.

1.

Which of the following best describes your home?
Single-family detached
(a)
( )

(b)
2.

( )

Duplex or townhouse

Howmsuy people live in your house?

Garbage

1.

Hovv would you rate the City of Port Coquitlam's garbage collection service?

(a)
(b)
(c)
2.

( )
( )
( )

Ocod

Average
poor

Would you support a bag limit on garbage collection service?
ycs
(a)
( )
Nc
(b)
( )

If yes, would you pay an extra fee (i.e. $ 1.00) for every bag above the bag limit?
Ym
(a)
()
No
(b)
()
On average how at any bags of garbage do you put out for collection each week?
(a)
()
2
(b)
( )
3
(c)
( )
4
(d)
()
morc than 4
(c)
( )
.

What is a general estimate of thc xveight of garbage you set out weekly'
Do you have any gcncra1 comments or rccommcndations about the City of Pon
Coquitlsm's garbage collection scrvicc?
Comments

~0V&3 &a@

Rccycling
What rating would you give thc City of Port

Coquitlam'rogram?

(a)
(b)
(c)

Good
Average
=nor

( )
( )
( )

Do you currently recycle any of the following materials?
Ncwspapcrs
(a)
( )
Other paper or cardboard
(b)
( )
Glass
(c)
( )
Cans (Aluminum or Tin)
(d)
( )
Plastic
(e)
( )
Other:
(I)
( )
recycle now
( )
(g)

'on't

What other types of recyclable material would you supp
program.
Comments:

If you do recycle, what is the principal reason?
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(c)

( )
( )
( )
( )
( )

Concern for the environment

Concern about availabilityoflandfill sp
My children encourage me to recycle
I get p«id for my recyclables
Other:

If you do not recycle, what would you say is the princip
(a)
(b)
(c)

( )
( )
( )

Inconvenience
Believe tl..:e are better ways to handle
Other:.

Are you aware of the Recycling and Composting inform
Hall?
Yes
(a)
( )
No
(b)
( )

The City of Fort Coquitlam is proposing to setup a recyc
facilities at the corner of Broadway Street and Cameron A
encourage you to take your recyclahles to the depot?
Comments:
Would you use the recycling facility?
Yes
(a)
( )
No
(b)
( )

Ilml
I

I~

j'jg iiiii),

When should the recycling facility be open? What hours? What nays?
Comments:

aewiiig//
10.

lilt"

Do you have any general comments or recommendations about the City of Port

9i~iiiiii

Coquitlam's recycling collection service?
Comments:

I W Rl I ttl

t

giiiiii i iiii i

I

~l lsaaaj'j~j

LIJPPti'is Pi 'I

Jisis il ll

"''"llll F'==gR
P

~

P

aI
mt
-

I

I

I

I

Pirr ~

~ .

aipi m Sfl ~

.

g

~

~

I I I I SP i

~- ..... ~
I

~

P

~

iiii

i

I

hatt« I

i

I ~

I ~

I t lug

I

I

JJ.J( Jr,

),

st

SP~

J

lg. ttti eii

0

"I ii PP ~ Pl«,~—-'.''J Jii~
Ii

PP &II«I
I

I

i s".

Pl I

I

'g

I

(b)

( )

No

7.

When should the composting facilities be open7 What hours? What days?
Comments:

8.

Types of material composted 44e grass clippings, leaves, food waste, garden waste.

I Nil
!IS Ilail
Im

"IKPIIL

Hovv much material do you esttmate you compost annually?

9k
~4li l1lll
~

l;=-„l

iilIi ti

kg.

R~~

BRISK

4 ~W

itl /I
1'i

(N.

I

44 I 4

%i. [Jhl
1 II I kI
I

kill

i

''fliil8 ~@'hI I+
al

III'

I

ISI

Kj lh'. ~'--,'.- -

—'

— mi

- 'IissssilaslF ~ji

4= —

"'44-

pig,',a

NOV7 3 19S4
— :-\
I

Ia

I

II

ti,jgIQRISIIIIII'

l g gg

I

~,IIII

'4 I

S
I

emi~=,l;;;=gig~==- ., :I
41

m 35$ II

I

I ~

I

Its,l ~ ,S K I
4RIB Sl

Hl

II .s ~,
~

44

ill 4
I

p IRRIRIm

~

.

R~ ~

IRI

Financial Assistance Program.
This is to acknowledge receipt of your application to the MultiMaterial IIecycling Financial Assistance Program for the City of
Port Coquitlam's Backyard "omposter Distribution Plan.
Due to an oversubscription of applications to the financial
assistance programs and a reduced budget in this fiscal year,
I regret to inform you that processing of the subject
application must be delayed perding a review of the ministry's
budget situation.
The ministry is facing difficult decisions in allocating limited
funds in the most eguitable and beneficial manner. Once these
decisions have been made, a'nd if sufficient funding remains, or
becomes available to the program, we will be in a position to
process your application in this fiscal year. Zf not, your
application will be held for processing next fiscal year

~

(commencing April 1, 1995).

Il~l"~
III

I

I

I

IIIIHI

that an internal program review
identified the need to apply more stringent criteria in
assessing aoplications. In most cases, this will result in a
reduced level of fundino from current guideline levels.
You should also be aware

III

II! I ilII I
I

)l'll
I%II

II 'llkhll I
I

I I

RRI

Illa'II
II

RI

Is I

KI'I ~ R IIa

I

III

.. /2

II III I Rlf

i'iii

II

N,I

I

%IIII

'il

i1(lf
I

I
I

n I
I

'
,

I

I
I

NOIIt p 3

II 1 Is l

,::nargmII Ias

~ I

I

II

I'III

I 'I Il

'1
RI

I

I

I

:,I,gg IIII

IR',

RRI Pl IR ~
I

R

Ill ~

I

II

I. II ~

nl
'IV

II
II ~

IP

7I I ~

IR4
I~

—... IIRRn"

'' I

I II r

l%

~

I

I

I

I

IR
~ I

I

4..

I,

~Imam~:

I

I

ll

'

I

II

gy,

I

il I II
I I lt I

I

I

R

11

I
g

IB l1I

\R I'
I

11

Please accept our apologies for this delay in processing.

you have any questions concerning the application process orIf the
program review, please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned at 356-9970.

nd. P. Eng.
Head
Waste Reduction Programs Unit
D

cc1

I

Sll 5 m

Harvey Maxwell, Surrey Regional Office

5

'1

~ 11

11

Hllll

f

l7'Illa','I

I Il If
I

SAR 111

~1 sI S a SI ''

'I

~
I

~

III

I '1l 11!

~

e

I

aeI allI ~ ~ ~ ~ I

f II

I

g

11

I

11:.:

N&ii

~

I'g ~
I

giL

I

~

'l

I lm

I

a .ia

I

UU I

, UW ~ I

~I

,-:L Im

U

I

~

~'ag~

I

eIII %1

~

~

"'"

I

I

Ig fi
IHL"

-

Ig [~iRI

= = ia ~
~ R
I

'-

isa 1@II

THE CORPORATION OF THE
CITY OF PORT COQUITLAM

DATE: November 2

TO:

Environmental Protection Committee

FROM:

Anne T. Pynenhurg
Project Teclmician

SUB JECT:

SMOKING IN PUBLIC PLACES BYLAW DEVELOPMENT

BACKGROUND Ec COM5KKIXt
Anached is a report from the Metropolitan Board of I Jealth of Greater Vancouv
issue of smoking in public places and a copy of our smoking bylaw.
The report suggests that, in lieu of immediate implementation of provincial le
smoking in public places, they would like to see a coordinated approach in the Lo
to enforce existing bylaws with the aim of making public places 'and restaurants

January I, I996.

The Board is asking that each municipality look at their existing bylaws that res
public places and send a response to the Board.

Anne T. Pynenburg
Project Technician

IIL'~ iii

J 4
I

.-,

II

t,VINtilllai,
t llu

4
Ill II 4

'l

II
I

4IIJ

I

IS II-

la J4
II

I

"I

R» I

I

r ~

I

Ie'',

414 ~

NOVZ 3

~,

'IIIII I[ f'I lit I! 1'=: !..%I isI~ ~
I

I

~

I

I

I

~

IIs

lv I I II~44
nl n
~

'J
'' Ilt aS llv—
I

~

am;

I a 'llI

s

I

I

4 II

~

~

I

4l»'ili l

"I '

h'lEM

of Health o
Places byla

on on devel

al Protectlo
h.

L. M Trabou!ay

Mayor

~I

Imam i'Iamdmll/ [
I lmtl I
I

I

g

LMT/jm

I

cc:

='=.: mi if)i
ll!

I! a ela tl;l

I

~Nit,e I

IIII)I

~ 44414

Illttllj ii l I

I

T. Chong, City Administrator
Councillors

I~ I I

llm!I .I a;.Its al 1 l

'lliI'-'- '=-" =
g&lacIi i% 'Jill

s

%

Il

~

I'ISI, IP

4% 4 4 4

~I~

s t44I..— m
14 gaddi
—

4 I',

;4 4 Ijjg

Mal ".
I

~ Id 4 ~

I

IS

4

—: I

h;,,
« Il:

4'
I

IIII

I

~

44 I

I

III'I

WI4

~ E St

I

II

'dd

I

It II!,'I'

~

m+4 Ia jdl

'

4'

'

I

1

I

4

: dllltl
I

s aQ

'SM i

if4 144
I

S~1 I

I

4 ~

«

f~! S Ill KS / g~ I IS

I''"'f
I ~

f1S ~ S fI

I

I

11, fi g,PW%

I

I I ~

I

'

'

I~ I

~

4~4

%f 1111

IJ)I S114'
~

~

Riff

—

—

'

—.I li

I

ff

~ ~ I

414444 ~

-1%/

14 I

S

4

4

I)

44

1I

1

II,I lia41

afS:

I I f I'"" '
1~

w 411 ~ S S ff fS

411 4 I ~

I~E

=..

~

—— —

~ Sf
.

Jf f

C I-

44114

i

I

dl

I f SIR li!S

i

I

II

l

1

SSE:

~

I

.— ~ Smf. I lil

ROMIRlSTRRRVE OPRCES
IOEO W EIH aVE
VANCOUVER. E.C

IVIETROPOLITAN BOARO OF HEALTH
OF BREATER VANCOUVER

VEH

IC4

TELEPHONE 336 3033

November 3, 1994
Mayor Len Traboulay
City of Port Coquitlam

2580 Shaughnessy Street
Port Coquitlam, B.C.
V3C 2AS

Dear Mayor Traboulay

The Metropolitan Board of Health is made up of members of City Council and School Boards of Richmond,
Burnaby, Vancouver and representation on behalf of the three North Shore municipalities and two school
dbtricS. The Board's role is to coordinate public health policy in these municipalities.
SmoMnn in public places is one issue that members of lhe Metropolitan Board have received much
feedback trom the public. The Board directed the four metropolitan Medical Health Officers to draft a
uniform bylaw that could be introduced in each ol the municipalities that would achieve 100L% nonsmoking in most public places by January 1996.

The attached draft council report has been put together by the Medical Health Officers and the Chief
Environmental Health Officers.
At the Board meeting on October 26, 1994, the following motion was carried:

THAT the Metropolitan Board of Health endorses the recommendations outlined in the Draft
Council Report lor 100%, Smoke-Free Indoor Environmenlsi THAT the draft report be distributed
to all member municipalities including the surrounding municipalities of the Fraser Valley, and
THAT public consultation become a vital element of the process.
This bvlaw is also beina coordinated with the Fraser Valley Medical Health Officers. Whi/e we preter
provincial legislation, it is clear that this willnotcome about in the near future. Therefore, the Metropolitan
Board decided that a coordinated accroach in the Lower Mainland is the next best alternative,
This report commits to a public consultation process which involves the appropriate "stakeholders .
However, it is clear that the intent is to make public places and restaurants smoke free by January 1, 1996.

Sincerely

jM

rgaret Jessup (Trusted!

hair, Metropolitan Board of
Health of Greater Vancouver

'

~ I

~ NE ~ ~

Te

31

w
SIT

Bl

EII

IS S
'1 HEE

'''

III

~W IS g R
iif~m

B I I!

+" Rill 4

414,

EEISI

I 44lt

II'sa s
Ill I93 -

3 EEI

~l

El

1

II

=—.-'!,",38!«E =
«9 s I IIR=! - -=
ti

~I

'

'sl 'l lii -":ulR 0
I

Il

I

I

Iis -„-=

li

ss

I

I

SE ~ IB .4 ~ I ~

~

5E

— IE,~
—

". 933

EE

1 I REI I E

EL

I

IEI ~ Ers~

I

I
I

f

!

~

I

I

~II~

intent of this report is to provide Council with background
information and make recommendations towards ensuring safe and
healthy indoor environments free of tobacco smoke.
The

liwmi

BACKGROUND

15m s~~
'l4 Ill

(Your City) was one of the first major Canadian cities to restrict
smoking in public places .and the workplace when Council passed the
smoking by-law amendments to the Health By-law in (date of
enactment of your by-lawi. The Smoking By-law has been successful
as a "first step" in reducing exposure to environmental tobacco
smoke. Compliance levels are generally good and violations of the
By-law have been resolved without court actions. Nevertheless, the
By-law is now out of step with current medical knowledge about the
effects of environmental tobacco smoke. In addition, the general
public is becoming increasingly intolerant of smoking in public

g

I'fall@

places, especially restaurants.
ll il ~ -

= SSSI

f iii1 s1SI
Sml!ISR
I
g/'5
11ig
I
f~
I

I

I

I

NOV2 3 1594

I

g

1!1'- 'l;;

Pli

im iii 14ssll'

I

—,s I 4

Is II I I

-;='!i iii81""

IBm
I1

I

~

'S'1

I

II

IIIISsl I
4l SSI,

~

4m I

I

ss

~4

~

I

I I

I~

RIIS

I

II,I@i~

I

I

1144114;

sm" I! I SI

==:;alii lm ssl li1114 ~
I

I

RW

'11101,::: =

~

-1ll

Ill1s II II'18% i%I
.';, IR 4SS 1S
1'" + m ii[III5
II I ~ II
SIII IsIII
1I1
-,, 1,4g
"---:4
agmm'iilmi A&&Ill II lg III51
"5d
I

I
I

'ml~

iiIL1 !III@i::-- -= - =="'-S'4 Fi IS% III i Sii411 ~

I

~

I

—

'

Environmental Tobacco Smoke (E.T.S.) more commonly referred to as
secondhand smoke or sidestream smoke, was recently declared a Class
E.T.S.
A Carcinogen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
is responsible for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths annually
among U.S. non-smokers. Studies have also indicated that E.T.S.
increases the risk of other tyoes of cancer and heart disease.
The B.C. Ministry of Health estimates that tobacco smoky causes 50
lung cancer deaths annually in non-smokers, 37 from workplace
exposure. E.T.S. is estimated to be responsible for:
1,800 to 3,600 cases of lower respiratory tract infections in
infants with 200 to 400 cases requiring hospitalization;
~
80 to 400 new cases of childhood asthma per year;
~
1,000 to 4,000 asthmatic children whose symptoms have worsened
by tobacco smoke pollution.
Restaurant employees have a 50-904; increased risk of lung cancer
that is attributable to restaurant tobacco smoke exposure. They
are lf to 2 .times more likely to die from lung cancer. A strong
relationship between maternal smoking, and breathing tobacco smoke,
and Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (S.I.D.S.) has also been

established.

The weight of evidence now clearly indicates that persons who are
"passively" exposed to tobacco smoke are at an increased risk of
developing lung cancer and other serious diseases. The Provincial

Health Officer is expected to release a significant position paper
on E.T.S. later this year which will accord the elimination of
E.T.S. a high priority in our efforts toward improving public
health and reducing the burden on the acute care system.
DISCUSSION

Smoking By-law is typical of those adopted in the
1980s, placing 'partial'estrictions in premises such as public
buildings offices, restaurants, retail stores and institutions.
The By-law was based upon minimizing the effect of E.T.S. at
worksites and in public places. Its underlying assumption is hat
non-smoking is the norm (754 of British columbians do not smoke)
and that accommodations can be made to allow foz smoking in

The

'mlle ~

,.„Laj.%Ill

)Ij(8'jiij)

designated areas.
Nearly 10 years of experience with the by-law has illustrated that
placing smokers and non smokers in the same indoor space or even in
separate rooms that are on the same ventilation system does not
eliminate exposure to .obacco smoke since vhe H.V.A.C. systems
recirculate most of the contaminated indoor air. providing enough

IIIII

the natronal front zn the U.S. the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA) has proposed an outright ban on
smoking in the indoor workplace.
Although this proposal has
resulted in the predictable tobacco-sponsored write-in campaign, it
has received the support of the Building Owners'nd
(BOMA). BOMA actually requested such a ban over a year
ago since it feels that ETS is the leading cause of indoor air
quality complaints as well as the primary cause of fires in office
On

buildings.

'iiiji)ll
I

I I Al

i

$8 1 m I

&

&

s)N( ( $
/

/

I

-

'
I

I

Managers'ssociation

„

I

ace imseIIW w I

., "

~~/ ~

~

g '] g g~ ~ Ilk";:
+

'llSSIIIN)g~~ll5IIILQ(fgj j~g)Rgb I-

—
= ~~ ~l~

I Iee sehl wf B —
ma Lee sea=~

NGV2 3 ig94

=—

~

m SLIKI

==sN~+4$
RSI~
eL=— —.~~

~~

—

--~all 5 ([)INg!~~eiaeesseea a iwma~ s» SlmSISIaS51
~eaamema~ gram~:

~ NJggmN---:

~~

e

Columbia is busy
The Workers'ompensation Board of British
seek to address
will
which
regulations
drafting indoor aiz ouality
the proposed
ETS as an occupational health hazard. unfortunately,
fact, they
In
proposal.
the OSHA
regulations do not go as far as
by-laws
smok).ng
municipal
in
approach
closely resemble the existing
this
which
areas",
smoking
of limiting smoking to "designated
draft
the
Furthermore,
report has already depicted as inadequate.
the
protection to workers s ine ica
proposa I a ffords even less industry.
region
The
entertainment and foodservice
to the W.C.B public
briefs
presenting
on
intend
ficers
Of
Health
for more stringent
lobbying
hearings in the spring of 1995,

regulations.
paper on ETS
Health Officer's position clean
Provincially, the Provincial
indoor
a provincial
may set the stage for discussionsis around
expect
can
we
that
no indication
However, there
air regulation.
i'n
futur
near
the
ETS
eliminate
to
such province-wide legislation
e.
despite sizable public petitions being tabled in the legislatu
Regional District Health
At. the local government level, the Capital achieve
100% smoke-free
to
Committee is considering strategies premises
as bars, bingo
such
environments in restaurants and other
halls and casinos.
has enacted a more stringent
Most recently, the City of Surrey
maximum smoking areas in
allowable
smoking by-law reducing the
The City of New
20%.
existing 50% to consultation
restaurants from the midst
initiative to
of a public
Westminster is in the
By-law.
Control
Smoking
their
revise
develop recommendations to
smoke-free
foz
Early results indicate strong (&90%) public support
indoor environments.
by the end of
(NO2'E: Si nce this project is expected to be complete
into this
results
November, we wi ll tzy to incorporate some of the
document, even

if it is as an Appendix)

REGIONAL COzORDI NATION

also reviewing
in the Lower Mainland are
Other Health Departments
approach
regional
A co-ordinated
control by-laws. environments
their smokingsmoke-free
considered
by
being
is
indoor
toward 100%
neighbouring
with
conjunction
in
Board of Health,
the Metro olitan municipalities.
This would help to alleviate
Lower Mainland
loss of
industry over potentialregionally
concerns from the hospitality
a
Although
municipalities.
customers to neighbouring
and will be sought, the lack of
uniform strategy is desirable need
not be viewed as a detriment to
unanimity among local Councils Evidence
from Cali fornia points to
implementing this strategy. after municipalities
have implemented
e loss of revenue
neg ig
the smo efact,
in
smoking bans for restaurants, and, due to more non-smokers
(who
restaurants tend to increase revenues
establishments.
smoke-free
make up 75% of the population) dining in

I'bl

the voluntary front, the Bzeathezs'ining Guide published by
AirSpace (Non-smokers'ights Society) identifies upwards of 500
that are
British Columbia eateries, most in the Lower Mainland, moking
in
non-smoking. Earlier this year McDonald's Canada banned
fzanchisees
to
encouraged
and
operations
all of its corporate
follow suit. The benefits to restaurants of eliminating smoking
For example, the
are signifP .ant but often understated.
non-smoking areas
and
between
smoking
elimination of distinctions
should redIPce waiting time for patrons and eliminates the need to
ask patrorIs for their preference. Cost savings in maintenance of
everything from drapes to air cleaning equipment can be
illnesses arising
significant. Lost staff time due to respiratory
In short,
from exposure to ETS will be virtually eliminated.
should be
establishments
service
elimination of smoking in food
uniformly.
the
ban
is
applied
as
as
line,
the
bottom
long
for
good
On

STRATEGY CONS IDERATIONS

the
report; recommends that Council adopt, in principle, that
also
It
suggest
objective of smoke-free indoor environments. consulted as to how
be
public, including key stakeholders, needs to
A
ETS.
best (and how fast) to move towazd the elimination of
smoke100%
of
achievement
phased-in approach is favoured with the
free indoor environments by sometime in 1996. Phasing-in would
allow time for education, acceptance, and the spontaneous
be consulted would
dissipation of resistance. Stakeholders to
licenses
foodservice,
the
representing
include associations
establishment and entertainment industry, BOMA, other affected
Heart 6 Stroke
industries, AirSpace, B C. Lung Association,addition,
general
In
etc.
Foundation, Cancer Society,
consultation with the public through various mechanisms is
contemplated.
In order to initiate discussion and consultation a tentative
be fine tuned
timetable for implementation is proposed and will back
to Council
report
A
consultation.
based on the results of the
schedule
as well as
implementation
the
1995
adjust
of
in the spring
the final by-law language including any necessary exemptions. One
possible approach to implementation is as follows:
April 1, 1995 -- ban smoking in the workplace (offices)
July 1, 1995 ban smoking in restaurantsindoor public places
Jan. 1, 1996 ban smoking in remaining
(bars, cabarets, bingo/casinos, bowling alleys)
Some resistance to an outright ban is expected from the foodservice
sector while significant resistance is expected from the last group
Some of the
based on the experience of other jurisdictions.
able'o
are
together a
we
put
addressed
if
resistance can be
region-wide ban on indoor smoking by convincing Lower Mainland
This

IIIP,ll

III'im
RWI I

I

I rrmll I

'I:

RI

~0

I

lml I II P I$ $
I

~
I

I

tr Ir

.

Ir 9

IP P

ar

Ill Ilsmmp

m

IrlliIII mPa)

I5Ii i ~ xs
Ir p.
IRI I I

I

If(I

.'„'5
IK,:I,'
II ~
ls!IP
N

I

~

~I

k

I

r'"

I

I

1r
~ I

lr

I

HOV23

~m p'pl ~ I!

Writ(t-I

II I

'

I

I

I

I

'

a sa

LII II ~ II

„"J IINII

III'r

III'mr) mIII

II II

~

I

'

I

1'TI

~

N

''Im

IW 551
1

ill P'm
I

IIIIII'I

litail
Slim aps

rill,mrr
N

'l lr(r I

I'I r II r I
I
~ I I

~
P ~

I

Ill
@pii1LW
-~II'IfHy

~[~

llllllii~I

Implementing smoke-free environment will have significant positive
envirormental and health benefits.
SOCIAL IMPACTS/IMPACTS ON ADULTS AND CHILDREN

will
Achieving smoke-free indoor environments through legislation
life
of
and
quality
health
the
on
impacts
have significant positive
of adult and children residents of (your city).
FINANCIAL IMPACTS

84 e
I

4444

I)g~

QIINLI!Ilg

lilj

iKi=

~)i
(Ill!Nil)!
=

II'( ".-"- -"-''
lpga, U

'.~

.... llllll
)I IIIII IIII Is!

il li Imll'5! II

II

I

I

I

ll

II!

'.'.I
I

I ~

II

have signifi.cant
Implementing smoke-free indoor. environments will
non-smoker,
employer
and
smoker
the
on
positive financial impacts
owner (reduced maintenance, reduced fire
(liabilities), building
ban would be generally
risk) and medical system. since a smoking
staff resources
additional
no
enforce,
easier
to
self-enforcing and

will be required.
Note: Long-term studies from 15 cities (University of California,
San Francisco) show that smoking bans don't have a systematic
negative impact on restaurant revenues.
CONCLUSION

The weight of medical evidence clearly indicates that the public
and workers "passively" exposed to tobacco smoke are at increased
risk of developing lung cancer and other serious diseases. Sound

time to phase out
public health policy would dictate that it isreport
proposes that
smoking indoors in fairly quick order. This
not totally
if
restricted
indoor smoking should be severely
'ban
in the
smoking
on
total
A
1996.
prohibited by January,
totally
workplace and public places is the only policy that wouldexposure.
workers from ETS
protect public health and the health of with
affected stakeholders
consultation
Clearly a great deal of
needs to take place in order to ensure that any negative impacts
may also
from an indoor smoking ban are minimized. Consultation
or
unachievable
ban
is
outright
an
where
identify some areas
unapplicable, in which case alternatives need to be explored.
4

4

4

4'' '
~ 14

ION OF THE CITY OF PORT COOUI TLAM
BYLAII NO.

2277

for The purpose of contrO)ling
places where peop,'e may smoke.
Minister of HealTh is necessary for any bylaw adopTed
the Municipal AcT;
termined thaT second hand Iobacco smoke (exhaled smoke
cigarettes. cigars and pipes) is a health hazard or
anTS of the City of Por1 Coquitlam;

g

for 1'he health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants
tlam To prohibit or regulate smoking, or boTh, in the
n this Bylaw more particularly set out.
of The Corporation of the City of Port Coquitlam, in

ts as follows:

nTexT otherwise requires.

it union, trust company, savings or loan company or
ipal Council of The Corporation of the City of Port

office of the Government of Canada, the Government
olumbia, or the City of Port Coquitlam;
~ ee I%I III I 4 g
ms

1

sauna and sTeam baTh;

Kl Wl
I 'I

"PerSOna! SerViCeS eetabliahmentn meanS an eStabliShment in WhiCh a perSOn
provides a service to or on the body of another person, and includes but
not
limited to a barber shop, beauty oarlor, heal1 h spa, massage oarlor, tattoo shoo,

(d)

el us 45

"Place of publ ic assembly" means a building or oortion thereof

(e)

s es s I

for The
gathering tpgether Of perSOnS far the purOOSe Of eduCat'iOn,usedwOrehip,
entertainment, recretion, business or amusement, but does not include a p!ace

where a private social function

I IIIIII II

is being held or a restaurant;

"Private social f unct i onn mean s a special social event for wh ich an entire
or building has been reserved, at which at1'endance is I imi1ed To people who room
have
been speci fical ly inviIed or desi gna ted by the sponsor . but does not inClude
eVentS whiCh are held priVately for the ourpose of business, sales or educatiOn:

ll1I II [
&

(g)

"prpprieTOrw meanS The Owner and OCCupier Ot, and a Jeraqn CpnTTO'.'ing aotiVitiea
in, premises regulated by this Bylaw.

(h)

wReCeptiOn area" meanS The publiC SpaCe uSed by an office or establ i shment for
the receiving or gree1 ing of cuStamerS, c Ilents or other persons dealing
with
such offiCe Or eatablishment;

2277

~ II 'w

'II
L1
'4 14
I

NOV 2 3

%4 OCT

1

3 1987'

wv m ~ ~ 'I Ill

Enllll idwwi I
1

441
I

I

'

Sl

lw:
'~II l

l

II

em

em

I

4 nail

m

v

I

II'n

I

wReataurantu meanS any OlaCe,. inC Iuding a beat Or Veh C e, Where tOOd i S
preoared, handled or dispensed, and is served or offered to the publ ic for
consump'I'on on the premises or con umot ion of f the premises w ithout further
preparation.
nRetail shoo" means a building or part of a building, booth, s1all or place where
goods are exposed or of tered for, sa).. by retai I, but does no1 include a
restaurant or a p!ace where the on.'y trade or business carried, pn is that of the
custom b I ending of tobaccos or sa e ol'obaccos, pi oes, c gars or smokers
i

I

i

I

sundries;

wService linen means an indoor line or two or more oersons awaiting services of
any kind, regardless of whether or not such services involves the exchange of

including but not limited to, sales, provision of information,
transactions or advise and transfer or money or goods;
"Smoke" or "smoking" includes the carrying or control of a lighted cigar
cigare1'te, oipe or other lighted smoking equipment.
ugervice counteru means the counter and an area of 5 meters continuous to the
counter.

money,

RETAIL SHOPS

'e illl

)]is

No

person shall smoke in a retail shop, except in a restros
shop used as offices by members of the staff.

retail

or a portion of the

PERSONAL SERVICES ESTABLISHMENTS

fl

In a personal services establishment having a seating capacity of more than ten
persons, a non-smoking area of not less than 25S of the total seating capacity
shall be designated by the proprietor.
(b) when a proprietor designa1'es a non-smoking area, the seating sha.'I be arranged to
be contiguous to provide a non-smoking area.

(a)

(IH~

II'i',a&a
II
~1m 'mIRIm
f

pll ~i'Ill

BANKS AND GOVERNMENT

II lili alii

No

I I I I I 111 ~
gl II f4 I II 5 $

COMMUNITY CARE

person shall smoke at any service counter in a bank or government office.

I

m

OFFICFS

FACILITIES ANO HEALTH CLINICS

person shall smoke in a conmunity care facility or health Clinic exceo1 in any
portion thereof designated as a smoking area by the community care facility or
health clinic authorities.
No

w

~

m E

6.

PLACES OF PUBLIC ASSEMBLY

Subject to Subsection 6(b), no persons sha;I smoke in an area being used ss p!ace

of subl ic assembly.

(b)

The proprietor of a place of public assembly may designate an area, not to excee
50S of the total floor area of such place of public assembly as smoking area ans
shell post a sign or signs with the text wSmoking In This Area Only" In the

designated smoking area.

2277
2

,I ~ I ~

s'
I

II

'

~m I

~
P

'( Ie
I

Ixp

~ I

.win a

1

I

I

e I msi i
g)

~II

hall not include:

res, music halls, .'ecture
aud,itoriums, gymnasiums,

Commissioner or by another
6(b) I

ulation of the total floor

n-smoking areas in the

d

f i ve

percentum (255) of

so

as to be continuous

igns in accordance with

ns at the entrance to the

urs, or if the lettering
ited on a clear panel, the
capita I letters having an
nenes). The sign or signs
ABLEw

nNON SMOKING SEATING ONLY"

(d)

Included in the lext at the bottom of each sign "City of Port Coquitlam Bylaw No.
2277n.

8.

RECEPTION AREAS

(a) Except as provided
(li"L RLII

I

area.

in Subsection

(b), no person sha!! SmOke in a recept ibn

I

&b) The proprietor may

designate an area of not less than 13 square metres l4O
square feet) ano not more than fifty percentum &50$ ) of the floor area ol ( tne
reception area for the purpose of smoking.

Mls

2277
3

II(! .

Fii'"
I

li

NGY

'-

: i~ m I

I i

il assi'

I
I
i I

Ii

nm ~ e 'i

ee 111 I Isa

2) %94'
'' i'

ELEVATORS, ESCALATORS AND INSIOE STAIRWAYS

9.

No

person shall smoke in an elevator, an escalator, or on an inside stairway
building.

in any
10.

TAXICABS

(a) No person shall smoke in a taxi .ab, except with the consent of
the driver of the taxicab.

a.'I',passengers and

of the
or
(b) The owner and tne operator of a taxicab shall ensure that a signpostedsigns
visible
and
conspicuously
are
this
Bylaw
type prescribed by Section 13 of
from all seats in the taxicab.
11.

BUSES

No person

shall smoke on a school or public bus.

SERVICES LINES

12.

person shall smoke in any indoor service line on any premises.

No

SIGNS

13.

which is regulated by
(a) Each proprietor of every building or portion of a building
I ype speci f ied in thl
the
of
or
signs
that'
sign
ensure
this Bylaw she I
o,
Section is posted so as to be clearly visible from all parts of each building
Bylaw.
this
regulated
by
portion of a building
"
height" means the actual
(b) For the purpose of Subsection (c& hereof, the letter
or lower case letter.
capital
height of the letter regardless of whether it is a
I

(c) The signs renuired by this Byla~ shall:
( i )
m~

I

I

v~

I 4 I

I ~,-„",,,'I

I

I

&

iii

&

'wer case,'etters or a

the following height
With respect to size of lettering, to be not less than of sight
for&
line
direct
in
distance
based upon the maximum viewing
letter height of 2 . 5 cent i metres ( I
( 10 feet) or less,
3)
A.

lg IIII

Three

&

inch).

letter height of 5.1 centimetres (2 inches).
of 7.6 centimetres (3
C. 12 2 metres (40 feet) or less, !atter height
metres (20 teat) or less,

B. 6.1

.jl

f

or

to be mounted on a
directly
contrast to the background colour.

ll / lg

Rjk jj,!

'[I g

I

combination thereof.

I

to a surface or

5

I

cap i ta

n

the
&ii) Consist of two (2) contrasting colours, or if clear
Panel, the lettering shall

]/)) mvsslm]j

a m no I

i

lettering is to be applied

I gg

IIJ.I 4 el'gyle 3

f)I %I'ill]

wNo Smok i ng",
Carry the text
matches

inches).

~

2277

m

4

147,m'i tl
m

II

wl

tj

,...,QGT 13 j987
I I m

p

I

I~

nu mml

I

I,, „sl&

I

~

I

8&

'

lm

."l.il lli jj,,.=N.

Ill n
I

I

I

sl j

letter height of 10.2 centimetres (4

metres (80 feet) or less,
inches).

0 ~ 24.4

metres
inches).

E. 48.8

&160

feel) or less, letter neight of 15.2 centimetres &6
letter height of 20.32 centimel'res (8

F. More than 48.8 metres (160 feet),

inches).

(iv) Include in the text at The bottom of each sign "City of Part Coquitlam Bylaw
No.2277« in letters not !ess than 1.3 centimetres (I/2 inch) in height for
signs with etter size of 2 .5 cent i metres ( I inch), and not less than anequarter of the height of the letters an all other sizes of letter
I

&d)(i) Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection (c), one of the graphic symbols
as shown in Schedule A af l.his Bylaw may be used to indicate no smoking areas.
Each symbol shall include the text "city af part caquitlam Bylaw No. 2277« in
letters and figures at least five percentum (5$ ) of the diameter of the circle
in the symbol and there may be added appropriate symbols, such as directional
arrows. Any such symbol shall be on a white background with a circle and
interdictory strake in red, «ith a cigarette, letters and figures in black,
provided such symbol complies with the other pravisions of this Section.

(ii) With respect to size of the graphic symbol, the diameter of the circle and
the symbol shall be not less than the number of centimetres (inches) prescribed
below, based upon the maximum viewing distance and direc) line of sight, as
follows:

A. 3 metres (10 feet) ar less, 10.2 centimetres (4 Inches).
B. 6.'I metres &20 feet) or less, 15.2 centimetres (6 inches&.
C. 12.2 metres (40 feet) or less, 20.32 centimetres (8 inches).
0. 24.4 metres (80 feet) or less, 20.32 centimetres (8 inches).
E. 48.8 metres (160 feet) ar less, 40.6 centlmetres (16 inches).
F. 73.1 metres (240 feet) or .less, 61 centimelres (24 inches).

(iii) Notwithstanding that the symbol is a cigarelle, it shall be deemed include a
lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe or other lighted smoking equipment.

II Ill!'0

14.

LWI' !'Illa'
P~

(a) Na person shall smoke in any place ar area designated as a non-smoking area under
this By!a~.

I

se I
lk I! I R,IR!NI
m I IW gl
I ~ I

I

I

I

3

GENERAL

I

(b) This Bylaw shall not apply to a private social function.

[

p!! I Ip Iml

.gg

31III'III VII I
III I11
ss
II
Im I%I
pp
!

g'III!,!l

I

I WI

mf! I! Ir Z

pip ~ m

il
I I

I

II ~ ~ ~ I
m

Ii ~

~

o oN

Is ~ I

2277

'I

5

I ~ ,

II
!

I

I I

OCT

III,
!I I!

III

IIII

l

oov)

I! ~

I! iw

~~
~ IL

I lmmmml
~I

:m

'Iia I: = =
I
I

I I

I R;:;

'p I m

Ia

I'

I Rp
p

P

IV

p

p

p1

~

;Nti;,

IP
I

p

nIII I!g; I: l

p

pl

p

II

I

uw

«

IS ~

=

"

I

P

I',„,

L

111

m

~

«ih»»p J I

L

s,

'R

l ]

)5

p
w

15.

OFFENCES AND PENALTY

(a) Any person who conti aVenea the provisions of this Bylaw is gu ii ty of an offence
and, on summary conviction, is liable to a fine of not less than $ 25.00 and not
more than 17 5.00 for tne first of fence; and not .less Than TI75LOO and not more
than 4150.00 for the second offence; and not less Than 5150.00 and noT more tnan

for The Third and subsequent offence.
(b) Any propria)or who fails or neglecIs to perform the duty imposed uoon him by
Sect'ion 13(a) hereof shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a penalty of not
$ 2,000.00

more than $ 2»000.00.

This Bylaw may be cited for a!I purposes as the "Port Coquitlam Smoking Control

17.

Bylaw, 1987, No. 2277».

Read a first time by the Municipal Council

this 11th day of May, 1987
Read a second time by the Muncipal Council Ibis 11th day of May, 1987.
Public representation received this 22nd day of June, 1987
Head a third time by the Municipal Council this 6th day of Ju.'y„ 1987.
Received the approval of the lain(ster of Health this 3rd day of Seotember, 1987.
Recons i dered, 1 i na ly passed and adopted by the Municipal Counci of the
Corporation of the City Of Port Coquitlam this 21st day of geo)ember, 1987.
I

I

5

I

I I If1 l44
IR I IIB
f) P
I

t

gll'4illf%

Ill

!41

g

IBI

glhcimiiiii ig
l

»L.M. TRABOULAY»

RECQkO OF AMENDMENT
BYLAw

Mayor

AMENOEO SECTION

)IO.
Ni I

~~ '! ~4IWBII

/j ge14%(
14

II

Iml

4) I I I I 4 44

I

'.

»R.A

FREEMAN"

Ci ty Clerk

I 444

'

14

I

444ii"
I.:—
I»

l4/II

i

II

IIRI III I

2277

INLI&

6

II »e I

Ih'44

c .

'114»
Fii
11 ~ Ile 'I
w

j»

»I

m

4
~

F'»

mll I r ",

'4 ill .

II

g(gf T I IIVIB1187

~

IRIS

I!'

Il Wl,4ll i~'ll
I

»

II ~ II

I.=

11»I ~ I ~ »

I

L

4

. — — NNI IIR Il'lf%

I

i1

I

I

I

I.

R

I'asaislm lr

I

I

»

~

I

114114l I

4 4

II

lull

;4 ~ lmm

'

I»

I

R II

I

I

I I RR

I

'i'll I!
'SII
I

~
~

»»I lm

II

RII

:»

IF
I

RIII

III

I'

/45~» II» » ~

IAIDO) l(R 4'»am I '

L

Il»m Il
I

~ II

~

I

I

ISMI ii
I

"PORT COQUETLAH SHOKIVG COVTROL SYLAIa,
"SCHEDULE

1987,

VO.

2277r

"a"

PORT COO

0

'eyLAW

22T

E

POR T CO
ByLAW 227"

g ( [I I 8 INI
CITY OF PORT COOUITLAM

2277

BYLAW

il.ii)
ha~em Li g(

()

e--:TT:- alt
,99aaa nit i ig
IIIL

.2277

I

7

II Ir ==

NQV al 3 'N94

lanai. iaii

illa '

II

'l II

l

I

i

~

r

re r
I

~

,~ irs al%alf

~

—.-.,;

RII
II

1
I

I

~

a aalu I l

I

a

II ~ a

U

a

''

—

Er
i

I

a

ii
a~

i

'a
~ II I p

arra:

—

ri ia a ialalii V isSS¹ll

13 E987

IIR,'; ~,= ..

~ I

i'I
I

itlllii llli% iliIIRIIII'8il--

OCT

~

a.:aa
lla

I ~

I ~ Iaa II,I
I

i

I

i

s

ii il

II II llgij„„=

a

ala 8
III I

I

"-;;—,', a'ma»alii aaaiia i '"'
~
IN I aalli IEI II